Opponents plan to use dollar signs to fight Delta tunnels

Friday

Aug 10, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Los Angeles residents will pay more for water imported through twin tunnels beneath the Delta, according to a new study that also illustrates how opponents hope to defeat the tunnels - by appealing to Southern Californians and their pocketbooks.

Alex Breitler

Los Angeles residents will pay more for water imported through twin tunnels beneath the Delta, according to a new study that also illustrates how opponents hope to defeat the tunnels - by appealing to Southern Californians and their pocketbooks.

The study, commissioned by environmental group Food & Water Watch, finds L.A. homes and businesses will pay somewhere between $4 a month and $19 a month for the tunnels, averaged out over 40 years. Actual monthly rates will vary and could temporarily increase to $40 or more, depending on a number of factors.

That's all on top of what Los Angeles residents are already paying for water.

Predictions aside, the report lends insight into one of the primary strategies that tunnel opponents will rely on now that Gov. Jerry Brown has announced his intention of moving forward with the project.

While they've always claimed that the tunnels will harm the Delta and the Stockton area, those opponents also want to convince urban residents of Southern California that the plan is a bad deal financially.

"We're going to present this information to everyday people in L.A. and see what they say about it," said Adam Scow, California campaign director for Food & Water Watch. "In an era of a bad economy, we need to prioritize ratepayer dollars."

Oregon-based ECONorthwest, which conducted the analysis for Food & Water Watch, found that the cost of tunnel water "does not compare favorably" with the cost of water made available through conservation, recycling and capture of rainwater, for example.

The new estimates are based on a projected tunnel cost of $20 billion to $47 billion. That's higher than the $14 billion estimate that state officials have provided.

The numbers are also based in part on a scenario in which the agricultural districts expected to help pay for the tunnels decide not to do so - which hasn't happened, at least not yet.

Jeff Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, said his district's own calculations suggest the Delta tunnels will increase rates for the average household by $4 per month to $5 per month.

"No one likes rate increases," Kightlinger said this week. "No one likes paying more. But I don't think the policy decision of whether to implement this project is going to be based on this $4-a-month rate hike layered in over a decade."

He questioned an outside group casting doubt on the project's affordability.

"I think it's an interesting argument that a third party is saying, 'You guys can't afford this,' " Kightlinger said. "Thank you very much, but we have a pretty good idea of our budget and costs. ... I understand they don't want it built, but it just seems weird saying, 'You can't afford it.' "

Environmentalists want Southern California cities to wean themselves off of the Delta and Colorado River flows imported by Metropolitan.

The region has already made strides toward self-reliance; it imports less water today than it did in 1990, despite adding about 5 million people, Kightlinger said.

Still, he said, about half of the region's water comes from hundreds of miles away.

Food & Water Watch argues that most of the water carried by the tunnels will go to south San Joaquin Valley agriculture, even though urban residents will be paying much of the bill.

"This is only going to raise rates even further for a project that doesn't benefit them," Scow said.